Boston police officers did not use excessive force and were not to blame for the death of David Woodman, a 22-year-old Emmanuel College student who stopped breathing after police arrested him during the Celtics championship celebration last June and died later, prosecutors said.

On the seven-month anniversary of Woodman's death, Daniel F. Conley, the Suffolk district attorney, announced yesterday that Woodman, after being arrested for public drinking, suffered an arrhythmia as a result of a preexisting heart condition.

His parents, Jeffrey and Cathy Woodman of Southwick, reacted angrily after a meeting with Conley yesterday, saying they cannot believe that police are blameless in their son's death. They said their son, who had heart surgery as an infant, led an active lifestyle and never suffered an arrhythmia before.

"I think it's a little unrealistic to ask us to believe that the police did everything right," said Cathy Woodman, a secretary, wiping away tears as she sat beside her husband during a press conference at their lawyers' office in Boston.

She said that the family had to wait months for the results of Conley's investigation and still does not have copies of the medical examiner's report or other documents that support his findings.

"We just wanted information," she said. "Now we have it, and it just sounds like a lie."

Government investigating itself!? If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it's a duck, isn't it?

(Please read this post to the very end for what REALLY HAPPENED)

Conley said that after reviewing the medical examiner's report, findings of a cardiac specialist, and interviewing police and other witnesses, he concluded that Woodman's heart condition caused his death.

"No police officer caused Mr. Woodman's death, and no police officer used excessive force in arresting Mr. Woodman," Conley said during a press conference at his Boston office. He said no criminal charges were warranted against the nine officers present during Woodman's arrest. Conley said he will immediately release the entire investigative file to the Woodmans.

After watching the Celtics' championship victory at a bar, Woodman, who lived in Brookline, was walking home June 18 with four friends and carrying a cup of beer when they passed the officers at Fenway and Brookline Avenue. One of Woodman's friends, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Woodman said, "Wow, it seems like there's a lot of crime on this corner."

The friend said officers slammed Woodman to the ground and then ordered his friends to leave the area or face arrest. But Conley concluded that Woodman would not stop for police and resisted arrest by grabbing a wrought-iron fence, requiring several officers to bring him to the ground. He was charged with public drinking and resisting arrest.

"They used a level and type of force appropriate to the resistance they encountered, and they complied with the Boston Police Department's rules and procedures in doing so," Conley said.

After Woodman was handcuffed behind his back, Conley said, the officers tried to get Woodman to his feet, but he could not stand. Believing he was drunk and unaware of his medical condition, police returned him to the ground, positioning him on his side, in case he vomited, Conley said.

"Within one or two minutes, they noticed that he was not breathing and had no pulse, and they immediately took action," Conley said. One officer began mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, another performed chest compressions, a third called for an ambulance, and three more ran for an ambulance, Conley said.

The Woodmans accused police of using excessive force and neglecting their son, pointing out that by the time he arrived at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, he had significant brain damage from a lack of oxygen. He regained consciousness, but days later, on June 29, he suffered another arrhythmia and died.

Conley said that Dr. James R. Stone, chief of cardiovascular pathology service at Massachusetts General Hospital and a consultant to the medical examiner in the case, found that both arrhythmias resulted from Woodman's heart abnormalities and that the second arrhythmia would have killed him, even if the first had never occurred.

Commissioner Edward F. Davis, who was at Conley's press conference, said later that he believed police acted appropriately. However, police policies might change as a result of the episode, he said.

WHY CHANGE if "police acted appropriately?" GUILTY!!!!!

For instance, he said, the nine officers who were present at Woodman's arrest immediately went to the hospital for stress treatment, leaving a superior who did not witness the event to write the report.

Yeah, MURDERING SOMEONE will STRESS YOU OUT!!!!

Thomas Drechsler, a Boston lawyer who represents eight of the officers, said it was a very stressful situation for the officers who arrested Woodman and then tried to revive him. "They felt awful about it," Drechsler said. "They did their best."

That's OFFENSIVE!!

If they felt so awful, they SHOULD NOT HAVE ROUGHED UP the KIDS!

The Woodmans' lawyer, Howard Friedman, said the family will review the investigative file and consult an independent medical specialist before deciding whether to file a lawsuit against the Police Department. Former US Attorney Donald K. Stern, tapped by Davis to conduct an independent review, said he will focus on police practices the night of the arrest.

The FBI and US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan will review the case to determine whether a civil rights investigation by the Justice Department is warranted.

So that's the toughest charge these murderers MAY face? CIVIL CHARGES? And they will GET OFF THOSE, too, right?

Cathy Woodman said she and her husband, an elevator mechanic, will keep fighting for their son "because it's not right that there were nine officers and one David, and all of his friends were shooed away."

I grieve for this family. What should have been a happy occasion for all was destroyed by tyranny that is based on lies -- and the world lost a beautiful young man who could have done great things. Now we will never know.

Being a PRO-POLICE STATE, PRO-AUTHORITY, agenda-pushing piece of garbage wouldn't have anything to do with it, right?

Let's GO BACK IN TIME, readers, to see what REALLY HAPPENED THAT NIGHT!

I find it sad that this needs to be reported by a Globe columnist, and wasn't ever referred to in any of the "news" reports (type David Woodman in to my blog search and scroll down).

"We watched the police unload from buses. They were in riot gear, with batons and shields. There were hundreds and hundreds of them, and I looked around and said, 'Is this really necessary?'.... People were high-fiving each other. They weren't fighting. It was not a hostile crowd. But the police kept pouring off the buses, and they were very aggressive and very hostile, and I was thinking, 'Do they really need this many cops?' And I was thinking, is this going to make things better or worse?"

It made things worse for David Woodman. He mouthed off walking past a group of cops, with a beer in his hand. Woodman said what Jim Rufo was thinking: that it seemed like there were an awful lot of cops around.... experiencing something that felt like a police state."

Even this brave reporter is biased; yes, the INNOCENT YOUNG MAN "mouthed off."

Jim Rufo is 44 years old, grew up in Holyoke and now lives near Albany. He and his wife, Tracy, have season tickets for the Celtics and they were there all year for the great, long ride, and were there the night that KG and the boys sent Kobe and the rest of the Lakers packing.

It was a terrific night and the Rufos stepped out onto Causeway Street feeling as good as they had ever felt. Within minutes, things turned uncomfortable.

Not with the crowd. But with the police.

"It looked as though they were ready for the south LA riots after the Rodney King verdict. We watched the police unload from buses. They were in riot gear, with batons and shields," Jim Rufo was saying the other day. "There were hundreds and hundreds of them, and I looked around and said, 'Is this really necessary?'

"I'm not going to tell you there weren't a thousand people who had too much to drink or were on their way to having too much to drink, but they were mostly happy. People were high-fiving each other. They weren't fighting. It was not a hostile crowd.

"But the police kept pouring off the buses, and they were very aggressive and very hostile, and I was thinking, 'Do they really need this many cops?' And I was thinking, is this going to make things better or worse?"

It made things worse for David Woodman. He mouthed off walking past a group of cops, with a beer in his hand. Woodman said what Jim Rufo was thinking: that it seemed like there were an awful lot of cops around.

For this, Woodman was grabbed by some cops and put on the ground and later he was dead. Now, you can dress this up any way you want: that Woodman had a preexisting heart condition, that it was an unfortunate accident, that it was any number of things. But the bottom line is David Woodman is dead and he died as a result of being taken into custody by some cops who didn't like some kid mouthing off to them.

You will never convince Jim Rufo that David Woodman is dead for any other reason than that the show of force put on by police the night the Celtics won their 17th championship was something of a self-fulfilling prophecy: that if you hype police officers up for battle, if you send them into a crowd of civilians with weapons, you are asking for trouble.

This is not peculiar to Boston. I've seen it happen in Belfast and in Brussels and in Belgrade.

If you give people with authority the green light to kick butt, some of them will overdo it.

But this has everything to do with Boston. After the Patriots won the Super Bowl in 2004, a 21-year-old named James Grabowski got killed, run over by another kid whose response to a football game was to go out and act stupid. That death, and the flaccid police preparation for and response to the riot that precipitated it, sullied the police department.

Months later, after the Red Sox vanquished the Yankees, another 21-year-old, a beautiful girl named Victoria Snelgrove, was killed, this time by police who were determined not let the anarchy that led to Grabowski's death happen again.

And now another kid, 22-year-old David Woodman, is dead, again at the hands of police officers, who may or may not be held responsible.

How many others have to die before the Boston police figure out that maybe, just maybe, they are helping to create the very conditions they seek to control with storm trooper tactics?

"I have nothing against the police. My grandfather was a policeman," Jim Rufo was saying. "We understand the police are in a tough position. But somebody died.

"On the way home, Tracy and I talked about walking out and feeling so good, and then experiencing something that felt like a police state. It was unnerving.

"I don't know what the answer is. But unless you have a riot, you shouldn't act like there's a riot."

Hey, this is the AmeriKan police state in action, so unless you want a club to the nose, you will shut up, Mr. Reporter!!!

REYKJAVIK, Iceland - NATO will need a military presence in the Arctic as global warming melts frozen sea routes and major powers rush to lay claim to lucrative energy reserves, the military bloc's chief said yesterday.

That's what this is REALLY ABOUT -- ENERGY SUPPLIES, under cover of saving the environment and taxing your fart-belching asses, 'murkn s***-eaters!

Oh, yeah, THEY ALSO SAID the Arctic was going to be ICE-FREE THIS YEAR!!!!

NATO commanders and lawmakers meeting in Iceland's capital said the thaw is bringing the prospect of new standoffs between powerful nations.

And WHO BENEFITS from WAR, huh?

"I would be the last one to expect military conflict - but there will be a military presence," NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told reporters. "It should be a military presence that is not overdone, and there is a need for political cooperation and economic cooperation."

Because it is IN the GLOBALIST FRAMEWORK and PLANS, folks!!!

The opening up of Arctic sea routes once navigable only by icebreakers threatens to complicate delicate relations between countries with competing claims to Arctic territory - particularly as exploration for oil and natural gas becomes possible in once inaccessible areas....

STILL IS NAVIGABLE only by ice-breakers!! God damn them and their LYING!!!

Some scientists predict that Arctic waters could be ice-free in summers by 2013, decades earlier than previously thought....

Hey, what's ONE MORE LIE when you have TOLD SO MANY, right, agenda-pushing press s***s?

"Glaciers around the world found shrinking for 18th year; Researchers say pace of retreat is quickening" by Jeremy van Loon, Bloomberg News | January 30, 2009

"Some maritime glaciers.... have grown in recent years, including 2007.... They include glaciers at Nigardsbreen, Norway, and Alaska that were helped by temperatures that remain below freezing and ample snow"

Oh, there is a NICE, DECEPTIVE HEADLINE for you -- so Joe Schmo will just see it and say, "yup, global warming is happening." Fuck your senses and what you can see in front of your face!!

BERLIN - Glaciers from the Andes to Alaska and across the Alps shrank as much as 10 feet, the 18th year of retreat and twice as fast as a decade ago, as global warmingthreatens an important supply of the world's water....

So now you must starve to death so richers can have more. How about investing in desalination plants to purify seawater then? Any STIMULUS going to THAT?

Some maritime glaciers, or those that terminate in the sea, have grown in recent years, including 2007, Michael Zemp, a researcher at the University of Zurich's Department of Geography said. They include glaciers at Nigardsbreen, Norway, and Alaska that were helped by temperatures that remain below freezing and ample snow.

Glaciers further inland in Alaska in such sites as the Kenai mountains and Scandinavia matched the overall declining trend seen in Chile, Colombia and throughout the Alps....

I'm really speechless at the SHAMELESS LYING by these FART-MISTING F****!!!!!

Glacier loss is measured by hammering poles into the ice sheet and observing how much the ice has retreated or gained against the measuring rod. Calculations are made, too, at the tongue or end of the glacier while satellite technology is also employed, Zemp said. The pace of the decline has doubled since the 1990s....

Glaciers at high altitudes and latitudes, such as Switzerland's Aletsch and the Devon Ice Cap in Canada, would probably survive a global temperature increase of 3 degrees.

Some glaciers in the Alps have shrunk so much it's becoming difficult to take accurate measurements, Zemp said. Such ice has not recovered from the 2003 European summer heat wave that melted the snow, revealing darker ice underneath which heats up faster than whiter surfaces.

Oh, you gotta go BACK 5 YEARS, huh?

So the glaciers are actually EXPANDING (as my links prove)!!!!

PFFFFFTTTTT!!!

The global average temperature has risen 1.4 degrees since preindustrial times, according to the UN's Environment Program.

That's what my big-city, Zionist-controlled War Daily is doing --as many bloggers have pointed out. The AmeriKan MSM and my War Daily play up the suffering of the poor charities, mostly Jewish, that suffer rather than Madoff and the whole system of rank looting and corruption and where the money went.

Today, the heads of 80 nonprofits around Boston will receive a letter that the Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family Foundation did not want to send. The organization will make no new grants in 2009, as it regroups after the Bernard L. Madoff investment scandal, which claimed about $145 million, or nearly half of its assets. The foundation will give out about $9 million, however, honoring all of its existing financial pledges.

Translation: It is suspending operations and shutting down -- even though this guy still sits on millions.

It's another blow to Boston's nonprofit scene, and a glum moment for one of the city's largest and most generous donors, which has given about $100 million to local charities over the past decade.... On a daily basis, Bostonians benefit from the Shapiros' generosity, more than many may realize. In 2008 alone, the Shapiro foundation gave about $18 million to dozens of nonprofits in healthcare, arts and culture, education, and Jewish causes. Anyone who has viewed a film at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, or knew someone who underwent heart surgery at Brigham and Women's Hospital, or taken a child to a play at the Children's Museum stage, has seen Shapiro money at work....

Awww, yeah, WE ALL BENEFIT from JEWISH LARGESSE after LOOTING US DRY!!

*************

Brandeis, the Waltham university that is a favored cause of the Shapiros, has over the years received more than $60 million from the family for buildings and programs. Carl Shapiro is a trustee emeritus at the school, and he's not afraid to speak up.

"Crisis raises questions on Brandeis campus; At issue are speed of cuts, other changes" by Peter Schworm, Globe Staff | January 28, 2009

.... Brandeis was hit harder than other colleges by the Madoff scandal. While it had not invested funds with the accused swindler, many of its top donors had. The school, founded in 1948, is the country's only nonsectarian, Jewish-sponsored university. Many of Madoff's investors, like Brandeis donors, are Jewish...."

In an October board meeting, when the university's financial chief was discussing growing losses in the Brandeis endowment, Shapiro grilled her about the poor performance, according to two people who were briefed on the meeting but wanted to remain anonymous because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. He was clearly frustrated by the investment losses, and was asking whether the university should fire the managers responsible.

Little did Shapiro know that his own investment manager was not just losing money in the market downturn, but allegedly swindling him and thousands of other investors.

First, the CHUTZPAH of Shapiro, and second WHY does the ZIONIST-CONTROLLED MSM keep saying ALLEGED when the guy has CONFESSED?

It's a subject the Shapiros have not yet wanted to talk about. Their names are etched in the stone of academic and medical buildings across Boston, and their pictures have been taken at countless galas in Boston and Palm Beach, Fla. But they are highly private people, especially now.

Their daughter Rhonda "Ronny" Shapiro Zinner is president of the foundation. She's an overseer at the Museum of Fine Arts and a well-known figure in philanthropic circles. She is married to Michael J. Zinner, chief of surgery at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Yeah, THEY are HELPING US ALL!!!!

And she's tough: Three summers ago, she took a foul ball hit by the Yankees' Derek Jeter to the head as she sat behind home plate at Fenway Park - and made light of it, despite needing stitches. Then too, she was embarrassed by the spotlight - the TV replays, the media coverage.

Seriously, THIS is a NEWS REPORT -- a FRONT PAGE FEATURE?????

Her sister, Ellen Jaffe, also is well known in the nonprofit world and is an MFA trustee. Jaffe is married to Robert Jaffe, an investment broker who helped raise money for Madoff and who says that he, too, was duped in the scandal.

That REEKS of INCEST, doesn't it -- as the generous Jews HELP US ALL!!!!

The third sister, Linda Waintrup, is also active at the MFA and the Huntington Theatre Company. The Shapiro foundation is hoping it can offer new grants in 2010, but is making no promises.... The Shapiro family declined to be interviewed for this story.

JPMorgan Chase says that its potential losses related to Bernard L. Madoff, the man accused of engineering an immense global Ponzi scheme, are “pretty close to zero.” But what some angry European investors want to know is when the bank cut its exposure to Mr. Madoff — and why.

Smells like they KNEW SOMETHING! Those that were NOT HURT by this swindle were IN ON IT!

As early as 2006, the bank had started offering investors a way to leverage their bets on the future performance of two hedge funds that invested with Mr. Madoff. To protect itself from the resulting risk, the bank put $250 million of its own money into those funds.

But the banksuddenly began pulling its millions out of those funds in early autumn, months before Mr. Madoff was arrested, according to accounts from Europe and New York that were subsequently confirmed by the bank. The bankdid not notify investors of its move, and several of them are furious that it protected itself but left them holding notes that the bank itself now says are probably worthless.

But the BANK is LOOKING OUT for YOU!!!!!

HOW MUCH BAILOUT LOOT did JP GET?

A spokeswoman, Kristin Lemkau, said the bank withdrew from the Madoff-linked funds last fall after “a wide-ranging review of our hedge fund exposure.” Ms. Lemkau acknowledged, however, that the bank also “became concerned about the lack of transparency to some questions we posed as part of our review.”

Investors were not alerted to the move because, under sales agreements, the issues did not meet the threshold necessary to permit the bank to restructure the notes, she said. Under those circumstances, she added, “we did not have the right to disclose our concerns.”

That doesn’t satisfy some investors. As they see it, they were the first people who should have been alerted to the bank’s concerns. “Instead, we continued to pay our fees to the bank and remained the only ones exposed to the risks that JPMorgan did not want to assume,” said the chief asset manager of an Italian investment firm, who declined to be identified because of potential litigation.

The tale began several years ago when a unit of JPMorgan Chase in London issued a series of complex derivatives that gave investors a way to triple their bets on the Fairfield funds, whose solid consistency mirrored the track record that had quietly — and ruinously — drawn investors to Mr. Madoff for decades.

Leveraged notes issued by big banks like JPMorgan Chase and Nomura became conduits through which fresh money flowed from institutional investors into the Fairfield Sentry and the euro-based Fairfield Sigma funds, both run by the Fairfield Greenwich Group — and, in turn, into Mr. Madoff’s hands.

The arrangement worked like this: Investors put up cash to buy the notes from the bank. In return, the bank promised to pay them up to three times the future earnings of the Fairfield funds. When the notes matured in five years, assuming the funds did well, these investors would get more than if they had invested in the funds directly. The bank collected just under 2 percent in fees, investors said.

And because the bank had to hedge its entire risk, it put up to three times the face amount of the notes into the Fairfield funds. Thus, Fairfield Greenwich got more cash to manage than it otherwise would have, increasing its own fee income. To reward note-holders for making that possible, Fairfield paid them a so-called rebate of a fifth to a third of a percentage point a year, according to documentation of those transactions.

The first sign of trouble came in early October, when Fairfield Greenwich notified investors that it would no longer pay them rebates. The reason, according to the Italian asset manager, was that JPMorgan Chase had “suddenly cashed out” of the Fairfield funds. “The official explanation was that there had been a strategic decision to get out of all hedge funds,” the asset manager said. “The Fairfield official was quite upset.”

Several other European money managers said they were told the same thing. A spokesman for Fairfield Greenwich declined to comment on the bank’s actions last fall, citing restrictions imposed by the beleaguered firm’s lawyers.

Given the turbulent times, the Italian asset manager said he thought the bank urgently needed to raise cash. That seemed the only way to explain why the bank would pull out of a fund that was up 5 percent when other major market indexes were down 30 percent, he added.

A source close to JPMorgan Chase, however, recalled bank officials saying that the bank’s “due-diligence people had too many doubts” about the performance of the underlying funds.

“They felt the consistency of its performance wasn’t any longer credible” given the downturn in the overall market, the source said. He added: “Just three months before that, I remember that they were ready to issue more notes.”

Some investors now note that Mr. Madoff maintained several accounts with JPMorgan Chase, and wonder if the parent bank saw trouble brewing in those accounts and got its London affiliate out of Fairfield before the storm hit.

The Italian asset manager’s colleague, the firm’s chief institutional adviser, said, “Since I heard about Madoff’s arrest, I have been wondering if it was just a tremendous stroke of luck — or if there was something JPMorgan in New York knew that led London to cash out.” Told on Tuesday about the bank’s explanation for its move, he added, “Now that I know why they say they got out, my doubts increase.”

Did the bank use its access to the Madoff checking accounts to detect trouble before his arrest? “Absolutely not,” Ms. Lemkau said. In any case, banking authorities say there is nothing wrong with a bank looking into a customer’s checking account to get information for its other lines of business.

“It is routine for the bank to look into your checking account if you apply for a loan — so why couldn’t they look into your account if someone else applies for a loan whose risks are tied up with you?” said Stuart I. Greenbaum, a banking specialist who is the retired dean of the Olin Business School at Washington University in St. Louis.

He added, “Still, I suspect that’s worth a lawsuit somewhere.”

One of the key tests in court would be whether investors could show that they were harmed by anything the bank did or failed to do last fall, or whether any other course of action would have simply made things worse, said Charles Mooney Jr., a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “If I were the bank’s lawyer, those are the questions I’d ask — and the answers are far from clear,” he said.

Investors say the bank should have done a better job of investigating the Fairfield funds before it issued the notes. Another European investment manager, who also declined to be identified because of potential litigation, says he decided to purchase the notes for his clients partly on the strength of the bank’s reputation.

He said that when he saw JPMorgan Chase “put its brand name” on the Fairfield notes, “I thought that there was no more reason to remain cautious.” He added, “For me, the JPMorgan notes were the final imprimatur of Sentry’s financial soundness.”

What has upset him and other investors interviewed about their stake in the notes is that they did not know that JPMorgan Chase had already exited from Fairfield, almost unscathed, without notifying them.

“We looked at the prospectus and concluded that they had no obligation to do that,” the Italian asset manager said. “But I certainly expected it, after such an unusual move.”

After JPMorgan started pulling out of Fairfield, with credit markets in disarray everywhere, the quoted price of the notes fell by about 12 cents on the dollar, a discount that discouraged some investors from selling because the price seemed at such odds with the Fairfield Sentry fund’s continued good performance.

An executive with a Swiss financial advisory firm said that he had placed an order to redeem some notes at the end of October. But when he found out how low the quotes were, he said, “I immediately placed a stop to the withdrawal — a decision that, after Madoff’s arrest, I haven’t stopped regretting.”

His regrets seem to be justified. Some buyers of the notes face the loss of their entire investment.

In a letter dated Dec. 31, 2008, Timothy R. Hailes, a managing director and associate general counsel for the bank in London, notified investors that Mr. Madoff had been arrested and that his firm was being liquidated by regulators. These events activated provisions in the terms of the notes that allowed the bank to substitute some other asset for the Fairfield funds, which “may have a considerable impact on the value and the amount payable” to investors, according to those contracts.

Investors said that the bank had not provided any further information about their potential losses, even when asked for updates. “As of today, I still do not know if JPMorgan attributes any value to those notes,” said one European money manager.

About two-thirds of the Fairfield-linked notes the bank issued were guaranteed against principal loss, according to the bank. But the bank said the owners of the remaining notes, like all the investors cited here, had probably lost their entire stake. That would mean a loss the bank puts at about $30 million but that investors say could be much larger.

“We believe the notes that are not guaranteed are now valued at zero,” said Ms. Lemkau, although investors “could reach some recovery through bankruptcy proceedings.” In any case, she added, “The risks were fully explained to clients in the purchase agreements.”

If the bank had withdrawn almost $250 million directly from Mr. Madoff’s firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, the bank would be subject to federal bankruptcy rules that give the court-appointed trustee leeway to recover money paid out over the previous year and use it to repay creditors. It is less likely that a similar withdrawal from Fairfield Greenwich would be within the trustee’s reach, but the question is certain to be posed in litigation, several lawyers said.

“I would consider it a probable development,” said the source close to JPMorgan Chase. “Especially with a redemption so close in time to Madoff’s arrest.”

This article was a joint investigation by The New York Times and the Italian business daily Il Sole 24 Ore. Claudio Gatti is an investigative reporter for the Italian paper, based in New York.

"Government's bailout.... fraught with hidden strings and government interference.... government's going to own a good portion of these banks.... Then Congress and the White House could start calling the shots"

That's FASCISM, AmeriKa!!!! All for YOUR OWN GOOD, right?

"Small banks saying no thanks to bailout; Loans come with too many strings" by Associated Press | January 30, 2009

WASHINGTON - A small but growing number of community banks are backing out of the government's bailout, which they see as fraught with hidden strings and government interference.

I'm glad I bank at a community bank.

About 20 banks so far that applied for or had been approved to receive about $1 billion combined in taxpayer money have reversed course in the past month. That's just a fraction of the hundreds of billions of dollars the government already has spent, but it shows that taxpayers aren't the only ones anxious about the financial bailout.

I would like to thank them.

"The government's going to own a good portion of these banks," said David Heintzman, president of Stock Yards Bank & Trust in Louisville, Ky. The bank recently turned down $43 million in approved bailout money.

Thank you!

After Congress approved the $700 billion bailout in October, the government gave banks only a few weeks to decide whether they wanted to take part in the government investment program. Many applied to get a foot in the door, in case predictions of an economic collapse came true.

"We drank the Kool-Aid," said Michael Ross, president of Fidelity Bank in Michigan, which applied for about $29 million. But as details emerged, the deal didn't look so good. For Fidelity, taking the money would mean the government would have owned about 25 percent of the company's outstanding stock. Then Congress and the White House could start calling the shots, Ross said. He remembers the government's failure overseeing Freddie Mac and its sister company, Fannie Mae.

Does that mean you have to Sig Heil salute when you show up for work?

Much of the criticism about the bailout has focused on the lack of oversight, which allowed banks to take money and refuse to say where it's going. But some community banks, which had little to do with the subprime mortgage crisis, say the deal didn't look great for them, either.

After the Congresscrappers told us they got all that in the bill.

Congress wants banks to make loans, so businesses can expand and people can start buying houses again.

Yeah, LOAN YOU YOUR OWN MONEY -- at INTEREST!

And CUI BONO(cha-CHING)?

But lawmakers also want them to make only trustworthy loans. But there are only so many good loans to make in a weak economy.

WASHINGTON - Suicides among US soldiers rose last year to the highest level in decades, the Army announced yesterday. At least 128 soldiers killed themselves in 2008. But the final count is likely to be considerably higher because 15 more suspicious deaths are still being investigated and could also turn out to be self-inflicted, the Army said.

That will happen when you wake up and realize YOU are the BAD GUYS!!!

A new training and prevention effort will start next week. And Colonel Elspeth Ritchie, a psychiatric consultant to the Army surgeon general, made a plea for more US mental health professionals to sign on to work for the military.

"We are hiring and we need your help," she said.

Shoulda thought about that BEFORE you sent us to war on LIES!!

Military should have STOOD UP to BUSH and the LIARS!!!!!

And WHY do I smell a DRAFT in the air?

"We need to move quickly to do everything we can to reverse this disturbing . . . number," Army Vice Chief of Staff General Peter Chiarelli said.

I'll tell you how, General: BRING the TROOPS HOME!! ALL of 'EM!!!!

Officials have said that troops are under tremendous and unprecedented stress because of repeated and long tours of duty due to the simultaneous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The stress has placed further burdens on an overwhelmed military health care system also trying to tend to huge numbers of troops suffering from post-traumatic stress, depression, and other mental health problems as well as physical wounds and injuries of tens of thousands....

Yup, so LET'S SEND MORE of them into the battle zones of WARS based on LIES!!!

"The Iraqi governmentcould still overturn its new decision, and the overall status of independent security contractors in Iraq remains unclear. Longtime observers said the matter is probably still under negotiationbetween the Iraqi and US governments"

What is with the DECEPTIVE HEADLINES, MSM?!!!

"Iraq says it will not renew Blackwater's security license" by Monte Morin, Los Angeles Times | January 30, 2009

BAGHDAD - Blackwater Worldwide, the security company accused of using excessive deadly force while protecting US diplomats in Baghdad, would be barred from work in Iraq under a decision by Baghdad officials to pull the firm's security license.

"We have been informed that Blackwater's private security company operating license will not be granted," a US Embassy official said yesterday. "We don't have specifics about dates. We are working with the government of Iraq and our contractors to address the implications of this decision."

The North Carolina company employs about 1,000 workers in Iraq to safeguard US State Department officials. But Blackwater security guards have been accused of being trigger-happy, most notably in a 2007 case in which they killed at least 17 Iraqis while protecting a US State Department motorcade....

The Iraqi government could still overturn its new decision, and the overall status of independent security contractors in Iraq remains unclear. Longtime observers said the matter is probably still under negotiation between the Iraqi and US governments. Anne E. Tyrrell, a Blackwater spokeswoman, said the company had yet to be officially informed of the decision....

Meanwhile, WHO would want to kill SUNNI POLITICIANS before an election?

See Occupation Iraq: Israel's IEDs and related links, readers, for WHO is RESPONSIBLE for the violence -- and keep that in mind as you read the Zionist War Daily's accounts!!"Gunmen kill three candidates in attacks; Security tightens ahead of voting" by Brian Murphy, Associated Press | January 30, 2009

BAGHDAD - Gunmen apparently targeting political candidates staged attacks around Iraq yesterday, leaving at least three people dead as Iraqi forces began imposing a full-scale security clampdown in advance of voting for provincial council seats.

The level of violence around Iraq is significantly lower than in past years, but tomorrow's election is seen as an important test of Iraqi self-reliance as the US military turns over more authorities to local forces. Blanket security measures were scheduled to take effect beginning today, including closing Iraq's borders, ordering traffic bans across Baghdad and major cities and halting air traffic. Hundreds of women have been recruited to help search women voters after a rise in female suicide bombers last year.

I'm so sick of the "female suicider" lie.That's a threat to the world, huh -- more than out mass-murdering missiles and nuclear weapons? That's what "Al-CIA-Duh" is left with?

In Baghdad, a Sunni candidate, Omer Farooq al-Ani, was killed in a drive-by shooting as he stepped from his home in the western Amiriya neighborhood, said a police officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Ani, a member of his neighborhood council, was running for the provincial seat under the biggest Sunni political group, the Islamic Iraq Party.

Northeast of Baghdad, another Sunni candidate was killed in a shooting ambush as he walked from a rally in Mandli in Diyala Province. The candidate, Abbas Farhan, was killed along with two others. In the northern city of Mosul, gunmen fired from a car and killed a candidate and former army officer, Hazim Salim, a member of the Unity List, a group of independent Sunni politicians.

Why am I getting the feeling these are GOVERNMENT DEATH SQUADS, folks?

CUI BONO?

FLASHBACK:

"String of bombs kills five Iraqi police; US ally killed in car in Baghdad" by Vanessa Gera, Associated Press | September 15, 2008

BAGHDAD - Also yesterday, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki formed a committee to investigate the killing of four employees of the Iraqi television network Al-Sharqiya as they filmed an episode on the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which began two weeks ago.

The Iraqi government has repeatedly accused Al-Sharqiya of bias, sensationalism and spreading anti-government propaganda. Owned by a former chief of radio and television for Saddam Hussein, the station is seen by many Shi'ites as pro-Sunni.

The employees of the station were abducted and killed Saturday in the northern city of Mosul. They included the head of the station's office in Mosul, two cameramen, and a driver.

Maliki's office said in a statement that he had ordered security forces "to chase down the perpetrators and bring them to justice for punishment."

You ever hear back on that? DOWN the RABBIT HOLE it went!!

We ALL KNOW WHY: It was one of Maliki's U.S.-sponsored and funded death squads that did it!!!!!

The US military is taking a sideline role in direct security for the elections, but plan to send heavy troop deployments into the streets during the voting.

A military spokesman, Major General David Perkins, said there is always the risk of attacks by groups "who see the progress of democracy as a threat to them" - a reference to insurgent groups such as Al Qaeda in Iraq that are weakened but still active.

PFFFFFFFFTTT!

In another possible flashpoint, Iraqi security forces detained three candidates loyal to Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr following a rally in Baghdad. Sadr controls the powerful Mahdi Army militia and is desperate to maintain a strong hand.

"Detaining the candidates is a serious precedent," said a parliament member in the Sadrist bloc, Baha al-Araji.

Now I'm CONVINCED: Maliki's UNPOPULAR GOVERNMENT is KILLING SUNNIS and IMPRISONING SHI'ITE OPPONENETS for the RIGGED RESULTS!!!

KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghan officials yesterday set Aug. 20 as the date for the nation's presidential election, starting the clock on a campaign that will be waged against the backdrop of an increasingly violent insurgency and rising domestic discontent.

President Hamid Karzai, first installed by the United States after the fundamentalist Taliban movement was toppled seven years ago, is widely viewed as the front-runner, although he has not formally declared his candidacy and his popularity has plummeted in the past year. Karzai's relationship with his one-time Western patrons also has grown tense.

Karzai, who was elected in 2004 to the post he already held, has an edge over those who have declared their interest in running, but it is not known how he might fare if a well-known figure such as Zalmay Khalilzad, the Afghan-born former US ambassador to Afghanistan and Iraq, were to enter the race....

Now you know whom the CANDIDATE and NEXT PRESIDENT will be!!!

Although some of Karzai's opponents complained about the delay, international bodies including the United Nations supported the timetable. As many as 30,000 additional US troops are to arrive in Afghanistan in coming months. Azizullah Lodin, who serves as chairman of the Independent Election Commission, described that influx as a factor in the timing of the election.

"Without security, there can be no election," he said.

So let's introduce MORE INSECURITY with a LARGER MILITARY FORCE! Oyvay!

The campaign comes amid a reappraisal of US policy in Afghanistan by the Obama administration, which has put Karzai on notice that tougher demands will be placed on him. The Afghan leader reportedly had a stormy encounter with Vice President Joe Biden, who paid a pre-inaugural visit to Afghanistan.

Bye-bye, Hamid!

Officials familiar with the discussions said Biden bluntly informed the Afghan leader that corruption, a key source of public discontent, had gotten far out of hand. Biden reportedly warned that without significant improvements, Karzai could not count on the backing of the US administration.

The Afghan president, for his part, has accused the international community of failing to deliver on promises of better security, making it difficult for his administration to establish its writ across Afghanistan. Critics sometimes call Karzai "the mayor of Kabul," a derisive reference to the lack of meaningful governance in much of the country.

In recent months, Karzai has openly expressed anger about civilian casualties that have occurred during coalition military operations. US troops have been involved in the majority of such incidents....

President Barack Obama and Karzai have met, but their relationship appears far less cordial than the one the Afghan leader enjoyed with President Bush. During a July visit to Kabul, the Afghan capital, Obama ruffled feathers by saying that Karzai had not "gotten out of the bunker" and created an effective judiciary and police force. The Afghan leader's aides were privately miffed, noting that he had survived a number of assassination attempts.

President Obama's inaugural committee raised far more than its fund-raising goal, taking in well over $53 million, much of it from 458 elite donors who kicked in $50,000 apiece.

I could live for years (at least, right now) on that. How come they ain't cutting me a check?

Overall, the committee reports it has received at least $48 million in donations from about 217,000 individuals, most of whom gave small amounts, plus more than $5 million in television fees and other revenues.

The committee set a budget of roughly $45 million for the gala events last week, meaning there could be a surplus of at least $8 million in donations from individuals. The White House press office and the Obama inaugural committee, a nonprofit corporation, did not respond to calls from the Globe requesting information about the disposition of a potential surplus. The committee, which is not required to report its expenditures, effectively shut down late last week.

They gonna KEEP IT -- as they SPEND THIS COUNTRY INTO A BOTTOMLESS CHASM!!!!!!!!

The Clinton inaugural committees generated surpluses in 1993 and 1997, though the amounts were never disclosed publicly. However, last month in releasing a list of its donors, the William J. Clinton Foundation, which oversees the presidential library and philanthropic projects, reported receiving between $1 million and $5 million from his inaugural committee.....

Welcome to the SECOND CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, Americans!!

Aaaaah, CHANGE!!!

*******************

Roughly half the total - $22.9 million - was in $50,000 donations, the limit set by the Obama committee, which also barred donations from corporations, political action committees, lobbyists, and labor unions. But the array of contributors reflects the diversity of support for Obama, whose campaign shattered fund-raising records using an extensive Internet network.

Somehow the grass-roots and Internet didn't seem to matter much with Ron Paul (or Howard Dean. for that matter). STINK!

Donors ranged from law firms, special interests, and regulated industries that deal with government to celebrities, philanthropists, activists....

In other words, SPECIAL INTERESTS and GLOBALISTS!

Entertainment industry figures contributed several million dollars, including a total of $275,000 from Steven Spielberg and four others from Dreamworks companies, and $50,000 each from directors Ron Howard and George Lucas, actors Denzel Washington, Tom Hanks, Jamie Foxx, Will Smith, Halle Berry, Samuel L. Jackson, and Sharon Stone, and singer-record producer Sean Combs.

And.... "Town officials... are trying to decide how much of a property tax break to offer and how they can secure state funding for infrastructure improvements.... although it could take several years for the studio torealize its potential"

Other major sources of contributions are employees of Google (21 donors, $166,000), Microsoft (17 donors, $157,000), Oracle (seven donors, $57,000), Yahoo (five donors, $65,050), and $50,000 apiece from global financier George Soros and four of his family members. Dozens of individuals from financial services, private equity, and hedge fund companies also contributed the maximum, and seven officials from Citibank, which has received federal bailout funds, gave a combined $139,475....

A review by the Globe also identified executives and employees of about 45 firms that do significant contract work for the federal government and who donated a combined $646,000 to the inaugural committee. Most of the companies are in the Washington area, many are minority-owned, and they provide technical or support services to military and civilian agencies.

Earl W. Stafford, founder and CEO of Unitech of Centreville, Va., a provider of training and simulation exercises to the armed forces and other agencies, not only donated $50,000 to the inaugural committee but spent about $1 million from his charitable foundation to pay for hotel rooms and other amenities so that 300 disadvantaged supporters of Obama could attend the inauguration.

"My donation to the Inaugural Committee had absolutely nothing to do with business," said Stafford, whose company was purchased by giant defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. in the past month for an undisclosed sum. "This was an opportunity to show my support for this historic moment in America, as well as the benefit to receive tickets for several of the Inaugural events, including seats to the swearing-in ceremony, the inaugural parade, and some of the inaugural balls."

But THAT had NOTHING TO DO with BIDNESS, uh-huh!

Don Smith, founder and head of Hard Light Consulting Group in Washington, which does government contract work, said he gave $50,000 because "I wanted my family and friends to be there with me and be a part of history." Officials in the Obama campaign, he said, "don't know me as Hard Light, they know me as Don Smith." He said he and his children knocked on doors and made phone calls for Obama during the campaign.

Except for a ban on money from foreign nationals, there are no statutory limits on the amounts or source of contributions for inaugural ceremonies....

WASHINGTON - President Obama yesterday scolded Wall Street bankers who received millions of dollars in bonuses last year, calling the payouts "shameful" while some of the firms received taxpayer bailouts, and chiding the executives for a lack of personal responsibility at a precarious time for the nation's economy....

This as he TAKES THEIR MONEY for his PARTIES!!!!

The president said he was reacting to a New York Times report yesterday about Wall Street executives who had given themselves about $18 billion in bonuses in 2008, the same amount they received collectively during the much more bullish 2004. The article was based on a report by the New York state comptroller's office that said last year's total of Wall Street bonuses was the sixth-highest ever, despite the poor economic performance of the firms....

Samuel Palmisano, chief executive of International Business Machines, made $24.35 million in 2007, the last year for which numbers were compiled by Forbes magazine.

And MY STATE just gave them $5 MILLION dollars that they didn't even want:

"$5m in tax breaks going to IBM for Littleton project

The Massachusetts Economic Assistance Coordinating Council approved $5 million in state and local tax breaks for IBM Corp., which recently began a $63 million expansion in Littleton. IBM vice president Bob McDonald said the company plans to create 42 jobs at the site over the next decade. McDonald said the computer giant, based in Armonk, N.Y., has already begun renovating a building and hopes to move into it next month. McDonald said the tax incentives were important, but the company would have gone forward with the expansion without them. IBM has 4,000 employees in Massachusetts, including about 2,000 in Littleton (Boston Globe October 30 2008)."

(Blog author exhales a sigh)

That included $5.8 million in bonuses. David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell International, earned $6.23 million, including $4.2 million in bonuses.

There could be one truly recession-proof industry, at least in the nation's capital - lobbying.

A watchdog group reported yesterday that various interests paid Washington lobbyists $3.2 billion last year, more than any previous year and a 14 percent increase over 2007.

The Center for Responsive Politics says that's more than $17 million for every day Congress was in session, and that's even with corporations in the finance, insurance, real estate, and automotive industries slowing their lobbying spending overall last year, relying instead on trade associations to represent them.

MADRID - A Spanish judge yesterday began an investigation into seven current or former Israeli officials over a 2002 bombing in Gaza that killed a Hamas militant and 14 other people, including nine children.

Judge Fernando Andreu said he sees a possible crime against humanity in Israel's attack targeting Salah Shehadeh with a one-ton bomb dropped from an F-16 warplanein densely populated Gaza City.

AmeriKa is an ACCESSORY to WAR CRIMES -- and therefore, GUILTY OF THEM!

The judge is acting under a doctrine that allows prosecution in Spain of crimes against humanity or crimes such as terrorism or genocide, even if they are alleged to have been committed in another country.

Spanish magistrates have used the doctrine to go after several current or former government leaders and terror suspects, even indicting Osama bin Laden over the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States.

But convictions or extraditions have been rare. The latest suit was brought by a group of Palestinians.

I wouldn't expect any here; however, it is certainly NICE to SEE the CHARGES RAISED!

The people named in it include Dan Halutz, who the suit says commanded Israel's air force at the time; and Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, then defense minister and now the minister of infrastructure. "It is a ludicrous ruling, and even more than ludicrous, it is outrageous," Ben-Eliezer said in a statement.

No, what is outrageous is the world's countenance of you shit-stinking NaZionist nation!

DAVOS, Switzerland - Turkey's prime minister stalked off the stage at the World Economic Forum red-faced yesterday after reproaching Israel's president over the Gaza offensive by saying, "You kill people."

The packed audience, which included President Obama's close adviser Valerie Jarrett, appeared stunned as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and President Shimon Peres of Israel raised their voices and traded accusations. Peres was passionate in his defense of Israel's 23-day offensive against Hamas militants.

Murderers usually are!

As he spoke, Peres often turned toward Erdogan, who in his remarks had criticized the Israeli blockade of Gaza, saying it was an "open air prison, isolated from the rest of the world" and referred to the Palestinian death toll of about 1,300, more than half of those civilians. Thirteen Israelis also died.

Of course, the Zionist MSM has to make sure it mentions the Israeli dead -- even if they don't always mention Palestinian deaths!

"Why did they fire rockets? There was no siege against Gaza," Peres said, his voice rising. "Why did they fight us, what did they want? There was never a day of starvation in Gaza."

The heated debate with Israel and Turkey at the center was significant because of the key role Turkey has played as a moderator between Israel and Syria. Erdogan appeared to express disappointment when he recounted how he had met with the Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel just days before the offensive and believed they were close to reaching terms for a face-to-face meeting with Syrian leaders....

Erdogan was angry when a panel moderator cut off his remarks in response to an impassioned monologue by Peres defending Israel's offensive against the Hamas rulers of Gaza.

"I find it very sad that people applaud what you said," Erdogan said. "You killed people. And I think that it is very wrong."

So the GLOBALISTS are WITH ISRAEL!!!

The angry exchange followed an hourlong debate at the forum attended by world leaders in Davos. Erdogan tried to rebut Peres as the discussion was ending, asking the moderator, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, to let him speak once more.

"You kill people," Erdogan told the 85-year-old Israeli leader. "I remember the children who died on beaches. I remember two former prime ministers who said they felt very happy when they were able to enter Palestine on tanks."

WARNING for European visitors: European Union laws require you to give European Union visitors information about cookies used on your blog. In many cases, these laws also require you to obtain consent. As a courtesy, we have added a notice on your blog to explain Google's use of certain Blogger and Google cookies, including use of Google Analytics and AdSense cookies. You are responsible for confirming this notice actually works for your blog, and that it displays. If you employ other cookies, for example by adding third party features, this notice may not work for you. Learn more about this notice and your responsibilities.